The Prosecution of Animal Cruelty Cases – An Ethical Imperative

Posted by Geoff Fleck, ALDF Attorney on May 29, 2012

I’ve written in the past about how important it is for animal cruelty prosecutors to "take the high road" and be scrupulously ethical.1 I stand by what I’ve said. But as I’ve studied and considered the issue further, it has occurred to me that an even more fundamental ethical issue presents itself with disturbing frequency – the failure of prosecutors to prosecute animal cruelty adequately or at all (usually citing overwork and/or the prioritization of human victim crimes). I conclude that it is not only a dereliction of duty for prosecutors not to aggressively prosecute animal cruelty cases, but that it is unethical as well.2

For what more noble service does the State offer than protection of the weak from the strong, the shelter of those politically disenfranchised from those in power, and the defense of the vulnerable against the tyranny of bullies? That’s what prosecutors do, or at least what they should do. It seems to me that this is the most important justification for their existence. They are the valiant defenders of victims’ rights no matter what the reason for the victim’s vulnerability – be it poverty, race, gender, age, physical or mental weakness or, I suggest, species. Violence is violence. Abuse is abuse. It has been proven beyond all doubt that the violent crimes of domestic battery, child abuse, abuse of the elderly, hate crimes, and animal cruelty are inextricably intertwined at both practical and philosophical levels. The empirical data is compelling.

Animal cruelty presents a five-time risk of violent crime against humans.3 75% of all violent offenders have prior records of cruelty to animals.4 25% of all “aggressive inmates” have committed five or more acts of animal cruelty as children.5 In families investigated for child abuse, 60% revealed pet abuse.6 Childhood cruelty to animals is an important predictor of later antisocial and aggressive acts and that children showing these behaviors, without intervention, are at risk for enduring disorders in conduct and mental health.7 In three surveys in women’s shelters in Wisconsin and Utah an average of 74% of pet-owning women reported that a pet had been threatened, injured, or killed by their abuser.8 The 1995 Utah survey also found that children witnessed animal abuse in over 60% of the cases, and 32% of women reported that one or more of their children hurt or killed a pet.9

Let’s take a basic description of "ethics:" “the discipline dealing with what is good and bad or right and wrong…” [Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, 1993].

In light of the irrefutable link between animal cruelty and human violence – especially domestic and child abuse – prosecuting acts of violence against animals addresses exactly the same issue as prosecuting abuses against humans. They are but two sides of the same coin. I predict that aggressive animal cruelty prosecutions will directly affect the number and frequency of related human violence crimes. If a prosecutor attends to his responsibility to prosecute animal abusers, I further predict that he or she will see a reduction in the number of offenses against humans. So by embracing animal cruelty cases as crimes deserving of aggressive prosecution, a State or District Attorney’s caseload of violent crime will actually decrease over time.

When they fail to earnestly prosecute animal abuse crimes, prosecutors forfeit a golden opportunity to stem the extraordinary violence which permeates our society. It is a "bad" and "wrong" thing to do and, it is therefore, unethical. On the other hand, prosecuting animal cruelty cases is undeniably right.

Hello Dennis Dawkins,of Kings Mountain NC,need help on this case,friday 5-25-2012,i went to work at 8:10 Cathy comeover to my station,she say Dennis TRA wont you to go out side and KILL a CAT,I say Cathy ther a limet so”mush i do for TRA,now TRA only been here for two mouths,I;ve been here for three years,so she walk off,next he comeover ,TRA,he ask me do i have a hammer,that the cat got hit by car,maid it 200 feet behine mill doc,he got hammer went out bash the cat head in,one lady went home to get a shelve to buried it,later that day i was call into office, write,up for not forfiling my duty,back to work on tueday after hollday,i ask for meeting to clear my name ,at meeting i ask Cathy,did she ask me,that TRA wont me to KILL the cat to KILL a cat she replied YES,i ask you,, so she firer me,I call anima control,thy came out got my statment,i have photos of where he KILL it,and buried it beside mill,shyolow grave,i lost my job for that,that not RIGHT,AM NOT A ANIMA KILLER,THEY SHOULD,HAVE CAII ANIMA CONTROL LIKE I DID,that the true,if i have to go worldwide i will,thanks for the ears,Dennis of KM NC.

How right you are! I’ve been fighting the same issue for a few months now. I’ve chronicled Hercules’ journey and tragedy by creating an organization called Paws for Hercules. I made a video to help me share his story and inspire others. I think the video does a better job explaining Hercules’ story than I could type here.

I find myself now at a crossroads. I don’t want anymore Pablo Flores’ slipping through the cracks. I just don’t really know where to go from here. The only thing I can think of is to start to work towards a goal of having the penalty for Lee County’s animal cruelty ordinance come with a misdemeanor or felony offense. (video: http://youtu.be/hp5nXGBlfkg)

The State of Michigan Court of Appeals overturned the Scientific Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, also known as Public Act 281, which would have allowed wolves in Michigan to be hunted if they are ever removed from the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) list. Read More »

Animal protection coalition has submitted a comment today, to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) sharply criticizing the agency’s “Labeling Guideline on Documentation Needed to Substantiate Animal Raising Claims for Label Submissions." Read More »